Ghost vs. ?

[Shr00m]

I have been using Ghost for 5+ years. I refuse to use anything higher then v.8.2 because of the drastic changes they made to it. I will probably be forced to switch after Vista comes out so I am looking at new stuff now.

What do you guys recommend for imaging software? How come?

 

[djnes]

Some people like True Image better, but it's only left me with corrupt images. I've been using Ghost since 4.0 days, and I won't use anything else.

The beauty of Ghost, if you use it the right way, through DOS (ghost.exe) or through something like BartPE (ghost32.exe), it doesn't matter what Windows version you are using. That's what aggravates me so much when I see people trashing Ghost. Very few people bother to use it the right way, and suddenly it's Symantec's fault....but I digress.

I've used it on Vista, Ubuntu Linux, etc...it doesn't matter. A Disk imaging program should never be run inside of Windows. You want exclusive access to the drive. The very same people who argue with me on this, are the same ones who agree that Memtest works well because it's run from it's own boot disc. People see Symantec in the same light as Microsoft, because of their crappy Norton line.

Anyway, sorry for the rant, but look into using Ghost in DOS mode or in PE mode. There's nothing to install, and it will work each and everytime, regardless of what's installed on your system.

 

[Soldur]

I switched to TrueImage when Ghost did not work properly with SATA drives. I would love to switch back to it b/c I do think it is a better product overall. Have they ever fixed the SATA drive issues?

 

[djnes]

I switched to TrueImage when Ghost did not work properly with SATA drives. I would love to switch back to it b/c I do think it is a better product overall. Have they ever fixed the SATA drive issues?

That was more of the chipset makers fault, not Symantec's. I've never had a problem using it over SATA drives, even when back when I thought RAID0 was actually a good idea. I used to back my array up without a problem.

It's the same argument involving Windows XP and needing to hit F6 to use drivers or not. I've been using Intel chipsets this whole time and never once had a problem. If it wouldn't see you're SATA drives, then using it with BartPE as I mentioned in an above post would have solved this. BartPE lets you add drivers, and then you could add in your ghost program.

 

[Conano]

I could never get ghost to work right. So i use true image now. Before i installed it, i tested it first. I found it worked for what i wanted which was baremetal backups. i was gonan reformat my system anyhow, so i backed up y system using it, whiped the drive usig fdisk, then ried the true image. Worked like a charm, no problems. So now all my systems use it. I formatted all my systems, Done the basic install of everythig i wanted installed, Made an image. So now if my discks ever get corrupt, all i gotta do is load up the backup. ad it's all fixed reset to "factory image specs" so to speak.

 

[zeplar]

Using Ghost 8.3 from the Solution Suite 1.1, although it seems to hang during multicasts more than it did with 8.2 from Solution Suite 1.0. Combined with WinPE 2005 for RAMdisk capability, and RIS, haven't had any problems beyond those occasional multicast hangs.

Used with IDE, SATA, SATA RAID, SATA AHCI, SCSI RAID0 and RAID5 after adding drivers. As djnes mentioned, using the ghost32 executable with PE works well. I did have to modify the txtsetup.oem file to get WinPE to load Intel's AHCI, since it's bundled with the RAID and SATA.

 

[Rofl-Mic-Lofl]

I've only used TrueImage, and have never had a problem with it, so I see no reason to.